Round Two: Henry VI/Lancaster vs Edward IV/York (ep 46)

For Round Two, we’re jumping right into the middle of an epic
battle: York versus Lancaster. The Question is which King
DESERVED to win the Wars of the Roses: Henry VI of the House of
Lancaster or Edward IV of the House of York. Both men were the
son of a warrior, both men sat on the throne, both men won the
crown in battle. So which King, Henry or Edward, do you think
deserved to be the ultimate winner of the Wars of the
Roses?

Henry VI was the son of one of the greatest kings in English
history: Henry V. Son of that great warriors, Henry VI was the
first King of England to inherit the French throne! King of
France and England, all before turning a year old. And there’s
the problem. 

The early years of Henry VI’s reign were also the early years of
his life! When Henry V realized he was dying, he made provisions
for his baby son’s reign with his brothers sharing
responsibility. So young Henry VI was surrounded by relatives
with their individual personalities and competing
agendas. 

The York family were descendants of King Edward III, just like
Henry VI was. Richard, Duke of York, was a loyal servant of the
King who wanted a more important job. The king needed someone to
establish order in France following the death of the Duke of
Bedford. He appointed the Duke of York lieutenant-general of
France. This was York’s big break, so he headed off to
France.

The King’s court fell apart in 1453. Summer brought disaster in
France. The English army was destroyed by a French force. This
represented a lasting defeat for the English. Henry VI was
devastated and, possibly as a result, fell into an illness that
left him unable to speak, recognize those around him, or
comprehend where he was. He couldn’t eat or walk. It was as if he
retreated from life. The next March, the Duke of York was elected
as protector and defender of the realm. It was agreed that he
would act until the king recovered.

The king recovered as suddenly as he had become ill. His physical
strength was restored. He was able to move around unassisted. He
was able to communicate. He recognized those around him. He was
delighted to see his wife and meet his newborn son. All those
around him reportedly wept with joy.

York did not weep with joy. He was thrown out of government and
responded by raising an army and eventually fighting for the
crown. After a series of battles, Richard Duke of York was killed
at Wakefield in 1460. But his son Edward took up the fight and, a
year later, was proclaimed King Edward IV.

The fighting continued. After Yorkist forces defeated the
Lancastrians, the Lancastrians regrouped. They were significantly
helped by the addition of the "Kingmaker,"who had supported York
but switched sides and restored Henry VI to the throne in 1470.
But York assembled a new army and fought back, taking the throne
once more in 1471. This time Edward IV made sure Henry VI and his
main supporters were dead or immobilized, and he reigned for a
dozen years.

So...was it ok for the Dukes of York to come out in open
rebellion against the King? Was it OK for Edward IV to take the
throne (twice) from an anointed King?

Who deserved to win the Wars of the Roses?



History shows us what's possible.